Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Next Moment in the Field: The Internationalization of Curriculum Studies and Studying Abroad" focuses on what curriculum theorizing might bring to the phenomenon of study in another country.As the reader will see, the contributions are creative and eclectic.Topics include women within global time and space; Japanese secondary school students' international cross-cultural experiences in the U.S.; novice Canadian teachers' experiences with intercultural curriculum in Japan and Hong Kong; the interrelation of race, class, and gender with U.S. preservice teachers' experiences studying in Honduras; U.S. imperialism and imposition embedded in the regulations and rules that accompany overseas teaching; international teaching experiences for early career professionals; subjectivities, relationality, and knowledge construction within international contexts; and the autobiography of an Indian woman studying abroad.The diversity of articles in this special issue is clearly its strength.This does not mean, however, there are not connections and interrelations.At least two themes surface in our analysis: Essays address the mutually constitutive relations of curriculum studies and study abroad and situate the intricacies of studying abroad by way of personal, political, economic, and social analyses and concepts.Accordingly, the articles within this special issue complicate and extend thoughts about internationalization and studying abroad and draw on concepts and theories inside as well as outside the study abroad and curriculum studies literatures.Taken as a whole, these essays redefine and expand what it means to study abroad.Key to this special issue, questions abound as to what to make of the internationalization of curriculum studies.How we conceive of this contested site-where language, culture, and power are insinuated with each other in ways that are not fully determinable-has implications for how we practice curriculum and pedagogy in the midst of the globalizing efforts of our colleges and universities.How we theorize and practice studying abroad within our educational programs necessarily will be varied, but there is a clear need to address issues of breakdowns, ambivalences, and even the failure of things to go as planned, in addition to the all too common focus on successes.Accordingly, the "complicated conversations" found within this special issue stand in
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".